A top Bristol surgeon convicted of biting his secretary has failed a legal challenge to get his shotgun certificate back.

Orthopaedic consultant David Johnson, who treated top football, rugby and tennis stars, was found guilty of biting his former secretary Krysha Kay James at the Spire Hospital in Bristol on September 2, 2015.

Johnson from Sea Walls Road in Sneyd Park always maintained his innocence, but lost an appeal of his conviction for assault by biting following a three-day hearing at Taunton Crown Court in June, last year.

He was ordered to pay £2,100 in compensation and costs.

This week he appeared at Bristol Crown Court to appeal against the revoking of his shotgun certificate.

Representing himself, he argued the battery conviction was a minor incident in an otherwise exemplary life.

But Judge Alistair McGrigor, Assistant Judge Advocate General and two magistrates dismissed the appeal, saying Johnson had demonstrated antisocial and disturbing behaviour when he committed battery.

The judge told the court: “He took leave of his senses for a brief period. It demonstrated a lack of self-control.

“We do not believe, at this time, he is fit to be entrusted with a shotgun licence.”

When he was first convicted at Bristol Magistrates’ Court, District Judge Lynne Matthews said: “Mr Johnson intentionally bit his secretary, he understands the consequences of such an action, it does not need a medic to appreciate the obvious.

Read More

“He did not intend to cause her serious injury, nor did he. He rebuked her for putting her arm across him as she reached for paper.

“The rebuke was short in duration, but, as the expert told me, more than a ‘momentary nip’. It was not accidental.”

She added: “This was entirely out of character, you [Johnson] have not hurt anyone before. The consequences have been devastating for you, damaging for your patients as they have been deprived of your assistance and very difficult for the victim.

“Your assault of her was not borne of malice, but arrogance that you could treat your secretary in this way.”

Defending, Nicholas Corsellis described it as a “bizarre case” and claimed Miss James was an “unreliable witness” who had become “trapped in an escalating sequence of events from which she could not escape.”